A Review of Light Shelf Designs For Daylit Environments

See discussions, stats, and author proﬁles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/322142534
A Review of Light Shelf Designs for Daylit Environments
Article in Sustainability · December 2017

DOI: 10.3390/su10010071
CITATIONS READS
0 182
4 authors, including:
Antonis Kontadakis Lambros Doulos

University of Thessaly National Technical University of Athens
6 PUBLICATIONS 24 CITATIONS 50 PUBLICATIONS 511 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Stelios C. Zerefos
Hellenic Open University
41 PUBLICATIONS 372 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Tunnel lighting measurements View project
Methodology for the Lighting Design of Historical Buildings View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Stelios C. Zerefos on 09 February 2018.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded ﬁle.

sustainability
Review
A Review of Light Shelf Designs for
Daylit Environments
Antonis Kontadakis 1, *, Aris Tsangrassoulis 1 , Lambros Doulos 1,2,3 ID
and Stelios Zerefos 3
1 Department of Architecture, University of Thessaly, Pedion Areos, 38334 Volos, Greece;
atsagras@arch.uth.gr (A.T.); ldoulos@mail.ntua.gr (L.D.)
2 Lighting Lab, National Technical University of Athens, Heroon Politechniou, 9, 15780 Athens, Greece
3 School of Applied Arts, Hellenic Open University, Parodos Aristotelous, 18, 26335 Patras, Greece;
zerefos@eap.gr
* Correspondence: kontadakis@uth.gr; Tel.: +30-2421-074314
Received: 23 November 2017; Accepted: 24 December 2017; Published: 29 December 2017
Abstract: Light shelves have been discussed in numerous studies as suitable solutions for controlling
daylight in side-lit spaces. It is a system that can be easily modified, offering a range of design
solutions. It can be easily mounted on the exterior and/or the interior of a vertical opening, it can
come in various shapes from static flat forms to curved reflective surfaces, or it can even be actively
controlled. A light shelf can offer shading and at the same time can redirect a significant part of
the incoming light flux towards the ceiling improving daylight uniformity. Due to the aforesaid
functions, light shelves are among the most popular system design solutions when it comes to
daylight exploitation. The purpose of this paper is twofold. Firstly, to present the main research
findings in relation to light shelves as daylighting systems and secondly to analyze the results, trying
to establish a common basis for some efficient and practical design rules. The present paper is a
review of the research realized in the last three decades concerning these systems together with their
associated implications in a building’s daylight performance as well as in its energy balance in a
few cases. In addition, the critical review of their design principles is included, which makes the
presented information useful for design teams trying to select the optimal available system for any
specific project.
Keywords: light shelf; innovative daylighting systems; daylighting devices; shading devices;
sunlight redirection
1. Introduction
Over the last decades, energy and environmental issues have led to increased energy efficiency
and improved indoor lighting quality in building design. Yet, despite technological advances in
lighting, it has not been possible to match the quality of the illumination produced by daylight.
Daylight is preferred by users because of its psychological and physiological effects. These effects are
well documented, covering an area from improved health, well-being and productivity for the users,
to significant building energy savings [1–5]. Lighting control systems can reduce energy use from
electricity by 20% or even up to 60% in certain conditions [6–8]. A side benefit to proper daylighting
are the reduced costs for cooling, as the amount of heat generated by the lighting system is also
reduced [9].
The use of daylighting systems, in an effort to increase core daylight illuminance, may reduce
lighting energy consumption, but careful design is needed in order to avoid possible increases in
cooling loads especially in cooling-dominated locations [10]. Thus, the main task of the design teams
is to balance antagonistic phenomena, in an effort to maximize the users’ thermal and visual comfort.
Sustainability 2018, 10, 71; doi:10.3390/su10010071 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2018, 10, 71 2 of 24
For example, simultaneous reduction of solar gains and the provision of sufficient daylight levels with
an improved uniformity is a typical problem that should be tackled during the initial design phase.
Daylight can be delivered into a building with conventional techniques; windows, clerestories, etc.
are common examples of side-lighting applications which have the disadvantage of only effectively
illuminating areas that are located near them. The area benefiting most is called a daylit or perimeter
area and is affected mainly by window placement and dimensions [11–14]. Consequently, daylight
distribution is not uniform in deep spaces, even when a fully glazed façade is used. In these cases,
daylight alone cannot adequately illuminate the space without additional support from artificial
lighting, especially in areas away from the facade. One way of addressing the problem is by
integrating systems to the aperture that are capable of collecting and distributing daylight into the
space, and if possible, enhancing the indoor daylight levels at the area further most from the openings.
Thus, incoming solar radiation can be controlled by either using shading systems, such as overhangs,
solar screens, venetian blinds, rollers and louvers, etc., where problems associated with solar gains and
potential glare can be moderated [15,16] or by adopting daylighting systems whose primary function
is to redirect a significant part of the incoming light flux towards the ceiling. Thus, a more balanced
distribution of daylight accompanied by a reduction of excessive illuminance levels near the windows
can be achieved [17–20].
There have been substantial research efforts placed on designing daylighting systems, in order to
protect occupants from direct solar glare, but also to improve daylight distribution. The latter can lead
to a reduction in electrical consumption for lighting [21–23]. Attempts to classify different daylighting
systems have been presented in several articles and review papers [24–28]. Light shelves represent one
of the most popular design choices in contemporary buildings and are often suggested in literature as
effective devices that can improve the lighting quality of a space and offer energy savings especially
when daylight controls are used. Light shelves are possibly the simplest among daylighting systems; a
horizontal/inclined surface which is placed on a window above eye level, either internally or externally,
is capable of controlling and redistributing incoming daylight through reflection on its upper surface.
Due to its position in relation to the opening, it divides the window into two parts; an upper part
(clerestory) which can be considered as daylight provider and a lower one (view) window. Therefore, it
can act either as a shading device which blocks excessive sunlight impinging on the working surface
and if installed externally, it can reduce solar gains or as a daylighting device, bouncing off reflected
sunlight usually onto the ceiling plane and pushing daylight deeper into the space. Till today, many
light shelf designs have been proposed. Static or sun-tracking, using specular reflection or refraction,
flat or curved; their performance is mainly examined in relation to the indoor lighting levels achieved.
The main task of this paper is the systematic review of light shelves as presented in the
bibliography, by examining the factors that affect their performance design aspects that need to
be considered when installing a light shelf; the influence of weather and sky conditions and, we discuss
several light shelf system configurations by synthesizing their content and summarizing the results
and conclusions. The purpose of the paper is twofold. Firstly, to present the main research findings
in relation to the light shelves as daylighting systems, and secondly, to analyze the results, trying to
establish a common basis for some efficient and practical design rules.
2. Overview
Although the use of mirrors as a means to redirect sunlight has been known since antiquity
(for example the specular characteristics of the concave side of shields used by Archimides in 212 BC
to burn the sails of the Roman fleet, or the use of mirrors to reflect sunlight at the theater stage) it was
Anthemius of Tralles and Isidore of Miletus who designed an early type of the light shelf for Hagia
Sophia in Constantinople (present day Istanbul, Turkey) in the 6th century AD. In the initial design,
Anthemius used reflective window sills, which were located around the dome so that sunlight was
reflected to the interior surface of the dome in an effort to increase its brightness [29,30]. A schematic
representation of the system is presented in the following Figure 1.
Sustainability 2018, 10, 0071 10.3390/su10010071 3 of 24
Figure 1. Schematic representation of the parapet of Hagia Sophia based on Anthemius’s reflector
Figure 1. Schematic representation of the parapet of Hagia Sophia based on Anthemius’s reflector
Figure 1. Schematic
superimposed representation
over the cross-sectionofofthe
theparapet
originalof Hagia
dome andSophia based
parapet on Anthemius’s
presented to [29]. reflector
superimposed over the cross-section of the original dome and parapet presented to [29].
superimposed over the cross-section of the original dome and parapet presented to [29].
Although in late nineteenth century reflectors were in production to increase indoor
Althoughlike
Although
illuminances ininlate
the nineteenth
late
Tageslicht century
nineteenth reflectors
century
reflector W.were
formreflectorsinwere
production
Hanifch to increase
andinCo.production
which indoor
wasto illuminances
increase
presented inindoor
Berlin
like the Tageslicht
illuminances reflector
like 1889,
trade fair during form
the Tageslicht W. Hanifch
illustratedreflector 2. W. Hanifch and Co. which was presented induring
and
in Figureform Co. which was presented in Berlin trade fair Berlin
1889,
trade illustrated
fair duringin1889,
Figure 2.
illustrated in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Daylight reflector by W. Hanifch and Co. [31].

Figure
Figure 2.
2. Daylight
Daylight reflector
reflector by
by W. Hanifch and
W. Hanifch and Co.
Co. [31].
[31].
It is not quite clear when the term “light shelf” started to be used. An early study for the use of
It is not quite
light shelves clear when
in hospitals was the termout
carried “light shelf” started
by Hopkinson to be the
during used. An early
1950s studythe
[32]. Since for light
the use of
shelf
It is not quite clear when the term “light shelf” started to be used. An early study for the use
light shelves in hospitals was carried out by Hopkinson during the 1950s [32].
represents one of the simplest systems which reduces solar gains and redistributes daylight into the Since the light shelf
of light shelves in hospitals was carried out by Hopkinson during the 1950s [32]. Since the light
represents one of the
building interior, simplest
a large systems
number which have
of papers reduces solar
been gains in
written andanredistributes daylight
effort to examine allinto the
related
shelf represents one of the simplest systems which reduces solar gains and redistributes daylight
building interior, a large number of papers have been written in an effort
parameters affecting their performance. Focused research on the performance of light shelves begun to examine all related
into the building interior, a large number of papers have been written in an effort to examine all
parameters affecting
during the 1980s. their performance.
Although the light shelf’sFocused research
effect on on theenergy
a building’s performance
balanceof(especially
light shelves begun
in cooling
related parameters affecting their performance. Focused research on the performance of light shelves
during the 1980s.
loads during Although
summer) the light shelf’s
is important, in this effect
review,onthe
a building’s energy balance
term “performance” (especially
is related to theinresulting
cooling
begun during the 1980s. Although the light shelf’s effect on a building’s energy balance (especially
loads during summer) is important, in this review, the term “performance”
luminance and illuminance distribution on the surfaces of the space associated with it. This is related to the resulting
in cooling loads during summer) is important, in this review, the term “performance” is related to
luminance
performanceand illuminance
varies accordingdistribution
to the prevailingon theskysurfaces of the
conditions, spaceshelves
as light associated
control with it. This
diffuse and
the resulting luminance and illuminance distribution on the surfaces of the space associated with it.
performance varies according to the prevailing sky conditions, as light shelves
direct illuminance differently according to the shelf’s geometry and the material used in its upper control diffuse and
This performance varies according to the prevailing sky conditions, as light shelves control diffuse
direct
surface. illuminance
External lightdifferently
shelves according
offer daylight to the shelf’s geometry
redirection together andwiththe material
shading used
of the in its
lower upper
window
and direct illuminance differently according to the shelf’s geometry and the material used in its upper
surface.
while the External
interiorlight
onesshelves offer daylight
can minimize redirection
the sun-patch together
area with shading
on a working of the
surface, lower window
especially in low
surface. External light shelves offer daylight redirection together with shading of the lower window
while
altitude angles, thus, improving luminance distribution. It is therefore evident that their depth low
the interior ones can minimize the sun-patch area on a working surface, especially in can
while the interior ones can minimize the sun-patch area on a working surface, especially in low altitude
altitude angles,
significantly thus,
affect improvinglevels.
illuminance luminance distribution.
An example It is therefore
is presented evident that
in the following Figuretheir3. depth can
angles, thus, improving luminance distribution. It is therefore evident that their depth can significantly
significantly affect illuminance levels. An example is presented in the following Figure 3.
affect illuminance levels. An example is presented in the following Figure 3.
Figure
Figure 3. 3. Various
Various interiorradiance
interior radiancerenderings
renderingsof ofaasouth
south oriented
oriented room
room with
with dimensions
dimensions44××6 6× 3×m 3m
andand a windowtotofloor
a window floor ratio
ratio equal
equal to
to20%
20%equipped
equipped with:
with:(a) (a)
No Nolightlight
shelf,shelf,
underunder
overcast sky; (b)
overcast sky;
(b)Perfectly
Perfectlydiffuse
diffuse external horizontal
external light
horizontal shelfshelf
light withwith
0.5 m0.5
depth (reflectance
m depth 0.8), under
(reflectance overcast
0.8), under sky;
overcast
(c) Perfectly diffuse external horizontal light shelf with 0.5 m depth, under clear sky
sky; (c) Perfectly diffuse external horizontal light shelf with 0.5 m depth, under clear sky conditions, conditions, sun’s
elevation
sun’s 37.8°;
elevation (d)◦ ;Like;
37.8 (c) but
(d) Like; (c)with mirror
but with external
mirror horizontal
external light shelf;
horizontal (e) Similar
light shelf; to; (d) to;
(e) Similar with
(d)the
with
external inclined upwards by 15°; (f)◦Similar €; (e) with a perfectly diffuse internal light shelf (depth
the external inclined upwards by 15 ; (f) Similar €; (e) with a perfectly diffuse internal light shelf
1.2 m).
(depth 1.2 m).
Thus, the parameters identified in this review, affecting light shelf’s performance are the
Thus, the parameters identified in this review, affecting light shelf’s performance are the following:
following:
(a)(a) Geometrical
Geometrical(width,
(width,length,
length,mounting
mounting height,
height, tilt
tilt angle
angleandandshape).
shape).
(b) Reflectance type (specular
(b) Reflectance type (specular or diffuse). or diffuse).
(c) (c) Material
Materialtype
type(metal
(metalperforated
perforated or or not,
not, transparent).
transparent).
(d) Position adjustment (rotation, operation).
(d) Position adjustment (rotation, operation).
(e) Building data (room dimensions including ceiling shape).
(e) Building data (room dimensions including ceiling shape).
(f) Climatic conditions.
(f) Climatic conditions.
It must be mentioned at this point that direct comparison of the performance of various light
It must
shelf designsbe mentioned at thisaspoint
is quite difficult therethatis nodirect comparison
analysis of the level
on component performance of various light
in the bibliography shelf
(except
designs
anidolicis quite difficult
systems). Theasexistence
there is noof analysis
light shelf on metrics,
component couldlevel
givein an
theindication
bibliography (except
of their anidolic
daylight
implications.
systems). Today, most
The existence of building
of light standards
shelf metrics, aregive
could oriented to the performance
an indication based implications.
of their daylight approach,
setting
Today, mostspecific targets for
of building the whole
standards arebuilding.
orientedThis in turn,
to the reduced the
performance basedusefulness
approach, of the light specific
setting shelf
metrics
targets formaking
the wholetheirbuilding.
comparison Thisininthe initial
turn, designthe
reduced phase cumbersome.
usefulness of theAlight
lightshelf
shelfmetrics
metric could
making
be comparison
their the estimation inof bidirectional
the initial design transmittance distribution
phase cumbersome. function
A light shelfwhich
metric represents
could bethe thevariation
estimation
of of optical properties
bidirectional with the
transmittance angle of incidence.
distribution function In all papers
which examined,
represents light shelf’s
the variation performance
of optical properties
was evaluated according to the illuminance levels on the working surface
with the angle of incidence. In all papers examined, light shelf’s performance was evaluated of a room or the luminance
according
distribution on its surfaces. Since room dimensions used by various research
to the illuminance levels on the working surface of a room or the luminance distribution on its surfaces. teams varied widely,
optimized designs varied as well.
Since room dimensions used by various research teams varied widely, optimized designs varied
as well.
Therefore, the criteria used for the performance evaluation of a light shelf, which are common
among daylighting systems, are the following:
1. An increase in illuminance especially in non-daylit areas.
2. An increase in the
Therefore, uniformity.
criteria used for the performance evaluation of a light shelf, which are common
3. The improvement
among of visualare
daylighting systems, comfort.
the following:
4. The
1. provision
An increaseofinsufficient
illuminanceshading.
especially in non-daylit areas.
2. An
Light increase
shelves canin be
uniformity.
categorized according to their geometrical form. Therefore, in the present
3. The improvement of visual comfort.
paper, research results are presented for (a) horizontal, (b) flat tilted, (c) curved and finally, (d) active
4. The provision of sufficient shading.
light shelves.
Light shelves can be categorized according to their geometrical form. Therefore, in the present
paper, research
2.1. Performance results
Analysis ofare presented
Static for (a)Light
Horizontal horizontal,
Shelves(b) flat tilted, (c) curved and finally, (d) active
light shelves.
This is the simplest form of a light shelf. The types of light shelves that have been examined are
horizontal and tiltedAnalysis
2.1. Performance with mirrored/diffuse
of Static Horizontal upper reflecting surfaces. Selkowitz, et al. [33], suggested
Light Shelves
that underThis
sunny
is theskies,
simplestlight shelves
form areshelf.
of a light effective at increasing
The types lightthat
of light shelves levels
haveatbeen
the examined
back of theare space
compared to standard
horizontal and tilted clear
withglass windows and
mirrored/diffuse upper concluded that in general,
reflecting surfaces. Selkowitz,simple light
et al. [33], shelf designs
suggested
provide
thatimprovements
under sunny skies, in daylight penetration.
light shelves are effective They suggested
at increasing lightthat maximum
levels at the back exterior light shelf
of the space
compared to standard clear glass windows and concluded that in general, simple light
depth (dext lightshel f ,max ) should be less than 1.5 times the height of the clerestory window (hclerestory ) shelf designs
aboveprovide
it. improvements in daylight penetration. They suggested that maximum exterior light shelf
depth ( , ) should be less than 1.5 times the height of the clerestory window (ℎ )
dext lightshel f ,max ≤ 1.5 × hclerestory (1)
above it.
According to Place et al. [34] the depth of the exterior ≤ 1.5 ×horizontal
ℎ light shelf should be 1.25–1.5(1) times
,
the height of the clerestory window for South oriented façades (for 20 either side of South) and ◦
According to Place et al. [34] the depth of the exterior horizontal light shelf should be 1.25–1.5
1.5–2 times the clerestory height for façade azimuth angles greater than 20◦ and lower than 160◦
times the height of the clerestory window for South oriented façades (for 20° either side of South) and
(azimuth from North 0◦ , clockwise).
1.5–2 times the clerestory height for façade azimuth angles greater than 20° and lower than 160°
Littlefair
(azimuth [35]
fromcontinued his previous work simulating the behavior of light shelves. His findings
North 0°, clockwise).
show an increase in daylight
Littlefair [35] continued uniformity
his previous butwork
without significantly
simulating the behaviorincreasing illuminances
of light shelves. at the back
His findings
of the show
room. anLight shelves
increase performed
in daylight uniformity better
but when
withoutthere was anincreasing
significantly external obstruction
illuminances atincreasing
the back core
of the room.
illuminance valuesLight shelves performed
by around 15%. Thisbetter
analysiswhenprovided
there wassome
an external obstruction
information increasing light
on optimum core shelf
illuminance
dimensions. The values
interior by depth
around(d 15%. This analysis
) shouldprovided
be someto
equal information
the height onofoptimum
the light shelf
clerestory window
int lightshel f
dimensions. The interior depth ( ) should be equal to the height of the clerestory window
above it (hclerestory ), while external depth (dext lightshel f ) should be smaller than the difference between
above it (ℎ ), while external depth ( ) should be smaller than the difference
the distances of the light shelf’s height from the floor (hlightshel f ) and the working plane (hwork− plane ).
between the distances of the light shelf’s height from the floor (ℎ ) and the working plane
Upper(ℎlight shelf).reflectance
Upper lightshould be as highshould
shelf reflectance as possible whileasitspossible
be as high performance increases
while its when it is
performance
used in high ceiling spaces, as illustrated in Figure 4.
increases when it is used in high ceiling spaces, as illustrated in Figure 4.
Figure 4. Cross-section of a side-lighted space with an extended light shelf (internal and external) and
Figure 4. Cross-section of a side-lighted space with an extended light shelf (internal and external) and
main dimension parameters.
main dimension parameters.
dint lightshel f = hclerestory (2)
dext lightshel f ≤ hlightshel f − hwork− plane (3)
Abdulmohsen et al. [36] investigated the impact of the light shelf depth on daylight working
surface illuminance using internal, external and combined light shelves. Upper light shelf surface
reflectance was 80% and light shelves depth varied from 0 to 3.5 m for the external and from 0 to 3 m
for the internal ones, mounted on the window 2 m above the floor. The evaluations were based on scale
models for daylighting measurements and simulation models for energy estimations in Texas, USA.
The scale model represented a South oriented open plan office space with dimensions of 9 × 9 m and a
height of 3.5 m with Window-to-wall Ratio of 100%. The light shelf was designed to provide adequate
shading to the lower view window and of course, to reflect light deep into the space through the
clerestory window above the shelf. Different light shelf depths were evaluated and compared against
overhangs of variable sizes corresponding to lengths of 1.2 m, 2.5 m and 3.65 m. In terms of illuminance
levels, uniformity and glare discomfort, the results showed that combined (internal and external)
light shelf systems perform more effectively, considerably improving uniformity. Among the cases
examined, an exterior light shelf with a depth of two to three times the height of the view window and
an interior light shelf with a depth of two to three times the height of the daylight window performed
in the best way. However, as the authors stated, the results corresponded to the data collected for a
low solar altitude angle (30◦ ) and this explains the large size of the shelfs.
Littlefair et al. [25] tested an internal light shelf that was 1 m deep at a height of 2.08 m from the
floor, mounted in a mockup office facing slightly West of due South (Latitude: 53.35◦ N). The office
space was 3 × 9 m with ceiling height of 2.7 m. Because the system managed to reduce light levels
more at the front of the room than at the back, uniformity increased under all conditions but with
smaller improvements occurring during overcast sky conditions. Compared with the reference case
(conventional glazing) findings from measurements showed a reduction in daylight levels ranging
from 10% to 20%. As a general conclusion they suggested that fixed systems can only increase core
illuminances under certain well-defined conditions; when the sun shines directly onto the window
and their performance could be increased if a movable system that can be adjusted to work more
effectively is adopted. It seems that a large increase in core daylight illuminance was not feasible and
therefore, in UK, these daylighting systems should be considered as shading devices.
Soler and Oteiza [37,38] used two South oriented scale models with rectangular openings to
examine the efficiency of a highly reflective (91%) light shelf, in Madrid, Spain (Latitude: 40.41◦ ).
The models represented spaces with dimensions of 6 × 6 m with a ceiling height of 2.8 m and a
Window-to-wall Ratio of 50%. One was equipped with the light shelf and the other was left free of
obstruction to act as the reference case. Measurements of mean hourly illuminances were obtained
during a period of one year from both models. The objective was to show the dependence of solar
elevation and solar azimuth on daylighting efficacy. This was defined as the ratio of the mean hourly
illuminances obtained by the model equipped with the light shelf and the reference model respectively.
As a shading device, the light shelf was designed with a vertical shading angle of 50◦ . The light shelf
provided higher uniformity than the reference model. Measurements show that the efficacy of the
system increases together with the solar elevation up to a point and then decreases. Further increase in
the solar elevation resulted in a decrease of the light shelf’s performance. The maximum values of
daylight efficacy (>1) are only obtained on clear days, and approximately between 110th and 270th
day of the year. This implies that exterior light shelves have a difficulty to treat lower sun positions.
In a similar study, Carlos, and Soler [39] compared the daylighting performance of two light
shelf configurations that had both internal and external parts against overhangs. Four scale models
with South facing apertures were constructed using the same space dimensions as [38,39]. The first
was equipped with a white opaque metacrilate light shelf, the second with a mirror light shelf, the
third had an overhang, while the last one was left without a shelf as a reference case. Illuminance
measurements
overhang weretook place to
designed in Madrid,
provide Spain for ashading
the same period of one(vertical
effect year. Theshading
light shelves
angleand the as
of 50°) overhang
shown
were designed to provide the same shading effect (vertical shading angle of 50 ◦ ) as shown in Figure 5.
in Figure 5.
Figure 5. Light shelf dimensions and vertical shade angle as examined in [39].
Figure 5. Light shelf dimensions and vertical shade angle as examined in [39].
Findings of that study showed that light shelves, by redirecting light into the interior, performed
betterFindings
than a of that study
classic showed
overhang by that
10–25%light inshelves,
termsby ofredirecting
illuminance light into the
levels interior,
inside performed
the space. The
better than a classic overhang by 10–25% in terms of illuminance levels inside
metacrilate light shelf is more efficient than the mirror one, during the central months of the year and the space. The metacrilate
lightthe
for shelf is more
hours fromefficient
08:30 to than the showing
11:30 mirror one, during the central
improvements rangingmonths
fromof10% the year
to 35%.andThe
for the hours
opposite
from 08:30 to 11:30 showing improvements ranging from 10% to
happens at the beginning and at the end of the year. These results emphasize the importance of the35%. The opposite happens at the
beginning
light shelf’sand at the
upper end ofreflectance.
surface the year. These results emphasize the importance of the light shelf’s upper
surface reflectance.
Berardi and Anaraki [40] assessed the benefits of light shelves, calculating useful daylight
Berardi and
illuminances (UDI)Anaraki
in office[40] assessed
buildings by the benefits annual
conducting of lightsimulations
shelves, calculating usefulWindow-
taking different daylight
illuminances (UDI) in office buildings by conducting
to-wall Ratios, window shapes, façade orientations and external obstructing elements into annual simulations taking different
Window-to-wall
consideration. The Ratios,
Southwindoworientedshapes,
space had façade orientations
dimensions of 10and × 15external
m and aobstructing
ceiling height elements
of 3 m into
and
consideration. The South oriented space had dimensions of 10 × 15
was located in Toronto, Canada (Latitude: 43.65° N). The optimal length and depth of the shelves wasm and a ceiling height of 3 m and
was located in Toronto, Canada (Latitude: 43.65 ◦ N). The optimal length and depth of the shelves was
calculated based on the following parameters: the window head height, the sill height, the height of
calculated
the based
light shelf, theon thethickness
wall followingand parameters: the window
the sun position (solarhead height,
altitude andthe
solarsillazimuth).
height, the Theheight of
results
the lightthat
showed shelf,
inthe
thewall
contextthickness and the
of analysis, lightsun position
shelves (solar altitude
increased the usefulanddaylight
solar azimuth).
illuminance The results
values
showed that in the context of analysis, light shelves increased the
mainly in the first 6 m from the windows and provided a more uniform distribution of daylight. useful daylight illuminance values
This
mainlyindicated
study in the firstthat6narrow
m fromfull-height
the windows windows and provided
provide bettera more uniform distribution
daylighting compared toof daylight.
shorter but
This study indicated that narrow full-height windows provide
wider windows and, light shelves have no benefits when applied to windows not facing South. better daylighting compared to shorter
but wider windows
Furthermore, the study and,showed
light shelves have no benefits
that regardless of thewhenwindow applied to windows
geometry, light not facing
shelves South.
enhance
Furthermore,
daylighting the study
especially showed
in the front that
zoneregardless
and especially of thefor window geometry,
South facades. light shelves
The maximum levelenhance
of UDI
daylighting especially in the front zone and especially for South
for cases without light shelves occurred at 3 m, 4 m, 5.5 m and 6 m away from the windows, facades. The maximum level ofwhen
UDI
for cases without light shelves occurred at 3 m, 4 m, 5.5 m and
window-to-wall Ratio is 25%, 35%, 45% and 55%, respectively. The presence of the light shelf 6 m away from the windows, when
window-to-wall
decreases a bit the Ratio is 25%, 35%, 45%
above-mentioned and 55%,
distances torespectively.
2.5 m, 3.5 m,The 4 mpresence
and 5.5 ofm.theThelight
finalshelf decreases
design of the
a bit the above-mentioned distances to 2.5 m, 3.5 m, 4 m and
light shelves had a height of 2.25 m from the floor with the reflectance set at 80%. 5.5 m. The final design of the light shelves
had aOchoaheightandof 2.25 m from
Capeluto theperformed
[41] floor withathe reflectance
daylight set at
analysis of80%.
a deep meeting room equipped with
a light shelf using radiance simulations. The room is located deep
Ochoa and Capeluto [41] performed a daylight analysis of a meeting
in Haifa room equipped
(Latitude: 32.5° N). with
Threea
light shelf using radiance simulations. The room is located in Haifa (Latitude: 32.5 ◦ N). Three systems
systems have been examined: a single window without any external protection, a horizontal light
have been
shelf and anexamined:
anidolica concentrator.
single windowThe without any external
dimensions of theprotection,
simulateda light
horizontal
shelf light shelf and an
are presented in
anidolic
Figure 6. concentrator. The dimensions of the simulated light shelf are presented in Figure 6.
Figure 6. Examined light shelf configuration with the main dimensions [41].
The results indicate that the light shelf provides a safer approach to the problem of daylight
The results reducing
penetration, indicate contrast
that thebetween
light shelfareasprovides a safer and
near the window approach
those atto thethe
back problem
of the room, of daylight
by
sacrificing
penetration, illuminance
Thereducing levels.
contrast
results indicate The
thatbetweenilluminance
the light areas values beyond
near thea window
shelf provides the daylight
and those
safer approach zone that
to theatproblem exceeded
the back of thelxroom,
300
of daylight
was 1.5–2
by sacrificing
penetration, times higher
illuminance when compared
levels.between
reducing contrast with
The illuminance the
areas near thereference
values
window case.
beyond In addition,
the daylight
and those the
at the backzone light shelf
of thethatroom, had
exceeded
by
maximum
300 lxsacrificing
was 1.5–2 efficiency
illuminance when
times higher levels.the sun shone
The illuminance
when directly
comparedvalues over
beyond
with the it, while its
the daylight
reference effectiveness
case. zone is
that exceeded
In addition, reduced 300 at
the light lxshelf
distances
was 1.5–2 more
times than 6–7 when
higher m from the window.
compared with The
the anidolic system
reference case. was
In found to
addition, theincrease
light lighting
shelf had
had maximum efficiency when the sun shone directly over it, while its effectiveness is reduced at
levels
maximum throughout the room
efficiency for allsun
orientations.
distances more than
Joarder et
6–7
al.
mwhen
[42]
fromthethe window.
performed
shoneThe
a series
directly oversystem
anidolic
of daylight
it, while
simulations
wasits effectiveness
found to increase is reduced
lighting atlevels
distances more than 6–7 m from the window. The anidolic systeminwasDhaka,
foundBangladesh
to increase (Latitude:
lighting
throughout
23.8°) ofthe room forcombined
horizontal all orientations. and interior) light shelves with a depth of 0.5 m in both
levels throughout the room for (exterior
all orientations. ◦
Joarder
directions et and
al. [42] performedsurfaceadiffuse
series of daylightequal
simulations in Dhaka, Bangladeshwas (Latitude:
the light23.8 )
Joarder etan
al.upper
[42] performed reflectance
a series to 88%. The
of daylight simulations analysis
in Dhaka,parameter
Bangladesh (Latitude:
of horizontal
self’s of combined
23.8°) height (exterior
from thecombined
horizontal floor underand interior)
overcast
(exterior andskylight shelves
conditions.
interior) with a7with
light Figure
shelves depth a of
illustrates 0.5
depththem in
0.5both
ofcases mthat indirections
were
both
and antaken into
directions consideration.
upper surface
and an upper diffuse reflectance
surface equal to equal
diffuse reflectance 88%. to The
88%. analysis parameter
The analysis parameter waswas thethe light
lightself’s
height from
self’s the floor
height from under
the floor overcast sky conditions.
under overcast Figure
sky conditions. 7 illustrates
Figure the the
7 illustrates casescasesthatthat were
weretaken
into consideration.
taken into consideration.
Figure 7. Extended lightshelf with equal depths for the internal and external shelf (0.5 m) and variable
heights that were examined [42].
Figure 7. Extended lightshelf with equal depths for the internal and external shelf (0.5 m) and variable
FigureAgain, as noted
7. Extended in otherwith
lightshelf studies,
equal the average
depths for illumination is higher
the internal and in shelf
external the case
(0.5 without the use
m) and variable
heights that were examined [42].
of a light shelf, while the uniformity
heights that were examined [42]. is better. The daylight levels calculated for the case w/o the light
shelf Again,
installed
as were
notedoninthe average
other 650the
studies, lx, average
but withillumination
uneven distribution.
is higher For thecase
in the cases with the
without thelight
use
shelves
of a lightthe maxwhile
shelf, avg. value (478 lx) was
the uniformity observed
is better. Thefor the highest
daylight levelsconfiguration
calculated for(2.75
the m above
case w/o the
the floor
light
Again, as noted in other studies, the average illumination is higher in the case without the use
shelf shelf,
of a light installed werethe
while on the average 650
uniformity lx, but with
is better. The uneven
daylightdistribution. For the cases
levels calculated withcase
for the the light
w/o the
shelves the max avg. value (478 lx) was observed for the highest configuration (2.75
light shelf installed were on the average 650 lx, but with uneven distribution. For the casesm above the floor
with the
light shelves the max avg. value (478 lx) was observed for the highest configuration (2.75 m above
the floor level), and the min. at 2 m height. In the deeper areas, the effect of light shelf height on the
illumination levels was not as significant due to overcast sky conditions. However, brightest interior
ceilings were recorded for a light shelf at a height of 2 m and darkest for a light shelf at a height of
2.5 m. The results indicate that light shelf with a height of 2 m from the floor level together with 3 m
high ceilings performed better than other alternatives including a reference case, where no light shelf
was present. In addition, there was a significant increase of the work-plane illuminance values ranging
between 300–900 lx by 60% compared with the unshaded case.
A study conducted by Hu et al. [43] evaluated the performance of various interior light shelves
initially using scale models in Raleigh, North Carolina, USA (Latitude: 35.7◦ N). The data collected
from the measurements were used to validate simulations performed on yearly basis using DAYSIM.
The parameters examined were the depth of the light shelf, the ceiling height and, interior partitions
typical of North American office building settings, in a multi-storey office building. The examined
interior lengths of the shelf ranged from 0.6 m to 3.6 m with a step of 0.6 m while the height and interior
kept the same. In the same manner the ceiling height was studied varying from 2.75 m to 3.65 m with
0.3 m step and the interior light shelf was set at 0.6 m. The results revealed that although light shelves
generally enhance daylight in areas away from the opening, their performance is dependent on the
clerestory area, and the ceiling height. Adding partitions that are either parallel or perpendicular
to the South-facing window results in a major decrease of the illuminance values especially in areas
away from the window. Among the six cases, the light shelf with 1.2 m depth performed better when
compared with the alternatives, but an interior depth of 1.85 m appeared to be the optimal solution
providing more shading by blocking direct sunlight. The increase of the ceiling illuminance resulted in
an increase of daylight penetration deeper inside the space.
Lim and Ahmad [44] assessed the daylight performance of several interior light shelf
configurations using side by side measurements of illuminance in two scale models which represent
spaces 8.4 m long, 8.4 m wide and 2.7 m high in Johor, Malaysia (Latitude: 1.33◦ N) with a
window-to-wall Ratio of 70.4% and glazing transmittances of 25%, 50%, and 75%. Single, double
and triple light shelves made of aluminum (reflectance 51.29%) were evaluated with a depth of 0.3 m
and 0.6 m (reflectance 51.29%) and variable clerestory heights (0.3 m and 0.45 m) under various sky
conditions, as illustrated in Figure 8. The internal light shelves were able to improve uniformity by as
much as 30–90% under intermediate sky without direct sunlight when compared with the base case
(without light shelf). The results proved that internal light shelves were not only effective to reduce the
extremely high illuminances at the area near to window, but were also able to increase illuminances at
the deeper area of the room and this occurs even for overcast conditions. According to the findings,
the most effective performance was achieved in low zenithal angles. These results are contradictory
to the results presented by Littlefair [36] whose main findings suggested a reduction in illuminance
levels under overcast sky conditions.
Kurtay and Esen [45] proposed a methodology for determining the best light shelf arrangement
using the simulation of a typical office unit for six latitudes for three different office heights using
CIE Standard overcast sky. Indoor illuminance values were correlated with various light shelf sizes
and positions and as a result, a set of curves were created. These curves (CUN–OKAY) can be used to
estimate a proper light shelf for a specific location.
Warrier and Raphael [46] used both illuminance measurements in scale rooms in Chennai, India
(Latitude: 13.08◦ N) and simulations to test the impact of two types of light shelves (specular and
diffuse) and their tilt angles on the daylight distribution. Measurements showed that when a horizontal
light shelf (aluminum or mirror glass) was used, there was an increase of about 21% in illuminance
levels. Surprisingly, the simulation studies showed that in 30% of the examined cases, the light shelves
increased the illuminance near the window reducing illuminance uniformity.
Lee et al. [47] compared the performance of two light shelves, one mirrored and one using diffused
reflection as this was achieved by a combination of various shapes of crystal faces located on the
flat upper surface of the light shelf. A South oriented room in Seoul, Korea (Latitude: 37.56◦ ) with
dimensions 4.9 × 6.6 × 2.5 m was used which had 32% Window-to-wall Ratio. The results indicate
that there is a substantial increase in uniformity. This increase was 29.9–34.3% for the external
Sustainability 2018, 10, 0071 10.3390/su10010071
light
10 of 24
shelf and 10.4–13.7% for the internal, compared to the existing flat mirror-type light shelf. In addition,
lighting energy
shelf and savingsfor
10.4–13.7% cantheincrease
internal,by 7.98–13.3%
compared (external
to the existinglight shelf) and by
flat mirror-type 1.8–4.4%
light (internal
shelf. In addition,light
shelf) when
lighting compared
energy savingsto the
can flat mirror
increase bylight shelf. (external light shelf) and by 1.8–4.4% (internal
7.98–13.3%
light shelf) when
Among compared
technical papers to the flat examined,
so far mirror light theshelf.
work of Moscoso and Matusiak [48] is very
Among
interesting technical
since papersthe
it examines soinfluence
far examined, the work
of a light shelf of Moscoso
-among andsystems-
other Matusiakon[48] theisaesthetic
very
interesting since it examines the influence of a light shelf -among other systems-
perception of a small office. Four different daylight systems have been installed in an office room in on the aesthetic
perception Norway
Trondheim, of a small(Latitude:
office. Four different
63.43 ◦ ) anddaylight systems have
fifty participants been installed
evaluated in an office
stereoscopic roomrating
images in
Trondheim, Norway (Latitude: 63.43°) and fifty participants evaluated
nine architectural quality attributes under clear and overcast sky conditions. The results understereoscopic images rating
ninesky
clear architectural
show an qualityincrease attributes under clear
on luminance and overcast
contrast when a sky conditions.
light The results
shelf is used givingunder clear
rise to glare
sky show an increase on luminance contrast when a light shelf is used giving rise to glare problems
problems and making the room less pleasant than other daylighting systems (such as reflective blinds).
and making the room less pleasant than other daylighting systems (such as reflective blinds). After
After analyzing the results, it seems that the reflective blinds rated highest in nearly all attributes.
analyzing the results, it seems that the reflective blinds rated highest in nearly all attributes.
Figure 8. Schematic representation of the cases studies that have been examined in [44].
Figure 8. Schematic representation of the cases studies that have been examined in [44].
2.2. Performance Analysis of Flat Tilted Light Shelves
2.2. Performance Analysis of Flat Tilted Light Shelves
Moazzeni and Ghiabaklou [49] examined a number of parameters using simulation: the external
Moazzeni andvaried
light shelf depth Ghiabaklou
from 0.3[49] examined
m to 1.2 m, thea internal
numbershelves
of parameters usingfrom
width varied simulation:
0 m to 1the external
m, while
light shelf
their depth
slope anglevaried from
was set 0.3to
equal m0°,
to 5°,
1.2 10°,
m, the20° internal
and 30°. shelves width varied
The educational spacefrom 0m
was in to 1 m,Iran
Tehran, while
(Latitude:
their 35.68°),
slope angle waswith equal to 0◦ ,of5◦7, ×108◦ m,
setdimensions ◦ and3.5
, 20with 30m◦ . ceiling height andspace
The educational a WWR was ofin
50% and all
Tehran, Iran
cardinal ◦
orientations were simulated. The results showed that for the south
(Latitude: 35.68 ), with dimensions of 7 × 8 m, with 3.5 m ceiling height and a WWR of 50% and all orientation, increased
light shelf
cardinal dimensions
orientations result
were in an increase
simulated. Theof the area
results of the work
showed plane
that for thewith suitable
south daylightincreased
orientation, levels
while
light glare
shelf was reduced
dimensions when
result in ancompared
increase of with thethe space
area of thewithout
work the
planelight shelf
with installed.
suitable It seems
daylight levels
that horizontal external light shelves are more efficient than those that have
while glare was reduced when compared with the space without the light shelf installed. It seems a slope angle of 30°. For
north
that orientations,
horizontal the lack
external of shelves
light direct sunlight
are more penetration
efficient resulted
than thosein athat
poorer daylight
have a slopeperformance
angle of 30◦ .
of the space when a light shelf is installed. As the light shelves’ internal and external depth increased,
For north orientations, the lack of direct sunlight penetration resulted in a poorer daylight performance
daylight illuminance decreased while their slope angle did not have any significant impact. The
results were nearly identical for the east and west orientations. Generally, the increase of the internal
and external light shelf dimensions decreased areas that were over-lit, due to improving the shading
of the space when a light shelf is installed. As the light shelves’ internal and external depth increased,
daylight illuminance decreased while their slope angle did not have any significant impact. The results
were nearly identical for the east and west orientations. Generally, the increase of the internal and
external light shelf dimensions decreased areas that were over-lit, due to improving the shading of the
window. The raise of the tilt angle of the shelf caused an increase in direct sunlight penetration which
in turn hindered the daylight performance of the space.
Moore [50] suggested that the optimum upward slope angle of a light shelf painted white can be
calculated using the equation for south oriented spaces:
◦
Slope Angle = 40 − ( Latitude/2) (4)
and 15◦ for east and west orientation.

Meresi [51] studied a south oriented typical classroom in Athens, Greece (Latitude: 37.98◦ ) using
simulation. The model used for the simulation was validated by comparing daylight factors estimated
by simulation and measurements from an actual classroom. The façade system consists of a light
shelf and semi-transparent movable external blinds. The results indicate that the best case in terms
of increased daylight illuminance levels and glare reduction is the one with the external light shelf
installed at 2 m from the floor, and a depth of 0.80 m ± 0.20 m and a tilt angle between 10◦ and 20◦ with
a reflectance equal to 90%. The use of a reflective light shelf to reduce glare problems and redistribute
daylight in an educational open-plan studio space was investigated by Al–Sallal [52]. In this research,
several tilt angles of a light shelf installed on the north façade were examined along with other design
parameters, such as the height of the light shelf and the slope of the ceiling. The average value of
the daylight factor for the base case was 30.28%. For the sloped ceiling case the avg. value for the
daylight factor was 29.24% and the daylighting levels in most points lower than 1 m in the studio
were less than 2000 lx. Though sloping the ceiling did not generally make much difference, more even
distribution of daylight factor levels across the height of the space was observed. The results indicate
that 5◦ sloped ceiling together with a slope angle for a light shelf equal to 60◦ , helped to reduce the
illuminance differences between the ceiling and the back wall.
2.3. Performance Analysis of Curved Light Shelves

We consider as advanced light shelves all shelves that either guide direct sunlight in the interior
of a space or concentrate and redistribute diffuse daylight. In almost all cases highly reflective surfaces
when used with static shelves have a more complicated geometrical form (i.e., anidolic), while the
cases of dynamic shelves (i.e., sun tracking light shelves) need a control strategy to adjust their position
in relation to the clerestory window. Thus, their operation is based on their rotation according either to
the sun’s position and aiming point on the ceiling [53] or to the lighting energy achieved [54].
In May 1996, Lee et al. [55] proposed a highly reflective curved light shelf with a small inlet
aperture capable of redirecting sunlight into depths of 9 m from the window wall. Scale model results
proved that illuminance uniformity improved more than a typical diffusing hemisphere skylight.
The system was installed in real scale where a number of visitors were polled for their opinion on
visual comfort issues. The results were satisfactory.
Beltran et al. [56] tested a number of light-shelf designs together with light pipes. This work
was a continuation of a previous research [57]. In total, four systems were tested in Los Angeles
(Latitude: 34◦ N) for south and east/west orientations. The light shelf designs that were tested
are presented in Figure 9. The systems were designed using ray-tracing techniques and daylight
measurements in scale models and then their behavior was simulated using the DOE 2.1E building
energy analysis software. The room used for the study had a clerestory window of 0.5 m height
while the room itself was 3 m high. Four light shelf designs were used: (a) a horizontal static exterior
and interior (depth 1.1 m in total) whose upper surface had been painted white, (b) a single level
curved light shelf with side reflectors whose surfaces had been covered with a specular reflector
film, (c) a bi-level and, (d) a multi-level light shelf. The curved (b, c, d) configurations consisted of a
segmented surface to redirect sunlight with changing solar altitudes. The inclination of each segment
was computed by considering window orientation and site latitude, to ensure an optimal angle for
redirection into the space. These segments were coated with a highly reflective thin film (reflectance
88%) that could produce two types of reflection: specular and narrow spread. The aperture area for
the single level light shelf was 2.8% of the floor area and a working surface illuminance over 200 lx
was achievedathroughout
throughout year from 10:30 a yeartofrom 10:30
13:30 at atodistance
13:30 at of
a distance of 8.4the
8.4 m from m window
from the under
window under
clear sky
clear sky conditions. The bi-level light shelf has an aperture area more than twice
conditions. The bi-level light shelf has an aperture area more than twice that of the single level and that of the single
level and achieves
achieves even higher evenilluminance
higher illuminance levels
levels than the than
base the base
case. case. Overall,
Overall, light shelflight shelf designs
designs can
can increase
increase interior daylight levels in a zone of between 4.6 and 9.1 m away from the
interior daylight levels in a zone of between 4.6 and 9.1 m away from the window wall under clear window wall under
clear
skiesskies
withwith a rather
a rather smallsmall aperture
aperture area.area. Follow
Follow up studies
up studies were
were presented,
presented, further
further developing
developing the
the aforesaid prototypes to improve daylighting performance at more oblique
aforesaid prototypes to improve daylighting performance at more oblique solar angles to the window solar angles to the
window
[58,59]. [58,59].
Figure 9. Schematic representation of the cases examined in [56].

Figure 9. Schematic representation of the cases examined in [56].
Lee et al. [60] proposed perforated light shelves aiming at minimizing the effect of wind pressure
when Leethey
et al.are
[60] proposed
installed in perforated light shelves
high rise buildings. Anaiming at minimizing
actual-scale testbed the waseffect
usedofto wind pressure
evaluate the
when they are installed in high rise buildings. An actual-scale testbed
performance in terms of lighting energy savings. The perforated light shelf was produced by was used to evaluate the
performance
punching holes in terms of lighting
of various shapesenergy savings.
into the The perforated
reflectors’ surface. The light shelf wasexamined
parameters produced were by punching
the vent
holes
ratio which is defined as the ratio of the perforated area to the entire area of the shelf and the tiltwhich
of various shapes into the reflectors’ surface. The parameters examined were the vent ratio angle
isofdefined as the
the shelf. Theratio of the
results show perforated area to the
that increasing theentire area of
vent ratio the29.5%
from shelf and the tiltthere
to 35.3% angleis of
anthe shelf.
increase
The results show
of lighting energy that increasing the
consumption fromvent ratiotofrom
20.6% 48.3%29.5% to 35.3% there
respectively, is an increase
in comparison withof lighting
the results
energy consumption from 20.6% to 48.3% respectively, in comparison with
from a case with a non-perforated light shelf. The reason for that is the reduced amount of naturalthe results from a case with
alight
non-perforated light shelf. The reason for that is the reduced amount of natural
that is brought into the indoor space via reflection due to the perforation of the light shelf. light that is brought
into the indoor
However, spaceenergy
lighting via reflection due to the
consumption perforation
is reduced when of the
the light
resultsshelf. However,
of the lighting
previously energy
mentioned
consumption is reduced
cases are compared withwhen the results
that from the caseof without
the previously mentioned cases are compared with that
any shelf.
from the case without any shelf.
Scartezzini and Gourret [61] presented a performance analysis of three anidolic daylighting
systems installedand
Scartezzini in aGourret [61] space
6.55 m deep presented a performance
in Lausanne (Latitude:analysis
46.51°). of Onethree anidolic
of them was andaylighting
integrated
systems installed in a 6.55 m deep space in Lausanne (Latitude: 46.51 ◦ ). One of them was an integrated
system as illustrated in Figure 10, which was assessed using simulations for two types of ceiling (flat
system as illustrated
and slanted). In bothincases,Figure the10,system
whichshows
was assessed usinginsimulations
an increase daylight factorsfor two types of ceiling
in comparison to a
(flat and slanted). In both cases, the system shows an increase in daylight
reference façade with conventional double glazing. In the deepest part of the room, the increase in factors in comparison to a
reference façade with conventional double glazing. In the deepest part of
daylight factors was 1.4 times the value of the reference case when there was no external obstructionthe room, the increase in
daylight factorsanwas
and 1.7 when urban1.4 times the value
environment wasof simulated.
the reference case when there was no external obstruction
and 1.7 when an urban environment was simulated.
Figure 10. Schematic representation of an anidolic daylighting system as examined in [61].

Another work dealing with the modification of the ceiling geometry is that of Freewan et al. [62].
Another
In this paper, work
Another the
work dealing
authors
dealing with
with the
studied themodification
the interaction between
modification of
of the
the ceiling
various
ceiling geometry is
is that
ceiling geometries
geometry of Freewan
that of Freewan et al.
with a light
et al.shelf,
[62].
[62].
In thisexperiments
using
In this paper, the
paper, theauthors
authors
with scale studied
models
studied the the andinteraction
Radiance
interaction between
simulations
between various
various ceiling
inceiling
a deep geometries
side-lighted
geometries with
space.
with a light
Various
a light shelf,
shelf,
ceiling using experiments
configurations
using experiments withwerewith scale
scaletested
models models
including and
and Radiance Radiance
curved, simulations
chamfered,
simulations insloped in
a deep upward a deep
side-lightedside-lighted
fromspace. space.
the window,
Various
Various
and
ceiling ceiling
sloped
configurationsconfigurations
downward fromtested
were were
the tested including
window.
including The curved,ofchamfered,
evaluation
curved, chamfered, the light upward
sloped sloped
shelf upward
performance
from the fromduethe
window, to
window,
modified
and sloped and
ceilingsloped
downward downward
geometriesfromis the from
based the window.
on the calculation
window. The
The evaluation evaluation
of illuminance of
of the lightthe light
levels shelf
shelfand performance
the uniformity
performance due
due on to
to
themodified
working
modified ceiling
plane.
ceiling geometries
The scale is
geometries is based
model
based onon
used the calculation
represents
the calculation a south of illuminance
oriented
of illuminance room levels
levels andand
in Irbid, the
Jordan
the uniformity
(Latitude:
uniformity on
on
the the
32.55°) working
with
working plane.
dimensions
plane. 6The
The scale scale
× 8model
m with model
used usedheight
a ceiling
represents represents of 3.25
a south aoriented
south
m and oriented
aroom room Jordan
window-to-wall
in Irbid, in Irbid,
Ratio Jordan
of 40%
(Latitude:
(Latitude: 32.55 ◦ ) with dimensions 6 × 8 m with a ceiling height of 3.25 m and a window-to-wall
located).
32.55°) with Thedimensions
illuminance6 levels × 8 m increased
with a ceiling in the rear part
height of the
of 3.25 m and room by 21–36% and decreased
a window-to-wall Ratio of 40% by
Ratio
20–55% of in
located). 40% thelocated).
The front when
illuminance Thelevels
ailluminance
curved levels
or chamfered
increased increased
in the ceiling
rear partin the
isof
used.
therear partby
When
room of21–36%
the room
changing the
andby 21–36%
ceiling and
surface
decreased by
decreased
reflectance by 20–55%
type to in the
specular, front
a when
further a curved
increase in or chamfered
illuminance
20–55% in the front when a curved or chamfered ceiling is used. When changing the ceiling surface ceiling
levels is
at used.
the When
back of changing
the room the
was
ceiling
observed. surface
reflectance This
type reflectance
increase typeaand
is 52%
to specular, to specular,
30% for
further a further
curved
increase inand increase
chamfered
illuminance in illuminance
ceilings
levels thelevels
back at
at respectively of the
in back
roomofwas
thecomparison the
room
with was observed.
the illuminance
observed. This increase This
values increase
is 52% estimated is
and 30%for 52% and
foracurved30% for
flat ceiling. curved and
In addition,
and chamfered chamfered
the illuminance
ceilings ceilings
respectively respectively
level at the front
in comparison in
comparison
of thethe
with room withreduced
was
illuminance the illuminance
by 27%
values values
and
estimated 30%forestimated
for curved
a flat forand
ceiling. a In
flat ceiling. In
chamfered
addition, addition,
ceilings,
the the illuminance
respectively.
illuminance level atInthe level
general,
front
at
thethe front
best
of the of
ceiling
room the
wasshape room
reduced was
in terms reduced
by 27% ofand by
daylight 27%
30% for and
levels 30%
and and
curved for curved
uniformity
chamfered and chamfered
wasceilings, ceilings, respectively.
curved. respectively. In general,
In general,
Extending the best
his ceiling
previous shape
work, in terms
Freewan of daylight
[63]
the best ceiling shape in terms of daylight levels and uniformity was curved. levels
examined and
in uniformity
this paper the was curved. of curved
combination
Extending
ceilings with a number
Extending his
his previous work,
of curved
previous work, lightFreewan
Freewan [63]
shelves examined
[63](Figure
examined 11).in this
inThe paper
thissouth the
the combination
paperoriented room used
combination of
of curved
for the
curved
ceilings
simulations with
ceilings withwas a number
8 × 6 m with
a number of curved
ceilinglight
of curved light
height shelves (Figure
3.25 m(Figure
shelves 11).
and window-to-wall The
11). The southRatio south oriented
orientedof 35.8%. room
roomBoth used used for
external
for the
the simulations
curved
simulationsand was 8was
chamfered ×6m × 6 ceiling
8 exterior
with m with ceiling
lightheight
shelves 3.25height
m and3.25
performed m andwhen
better
window-to-wall window-to-wall
a curved
Ratio Ratio
ceiling
of 35.8%. isofused.
Both 35.8%.
externalIn
Both external
addition,
curved and curved
uniformity
chamfered and chamfered
wasexterior
improved light exterior
compared
shelves tolight shelves
a horizontal
performed performed
betterlight better when a curved
shelf.a curved ceiling is used. In
when ceiling is
used. In addition, uniformity was improved compared
addition, uniformity was improved compared to a horizontal light shelf. to a horizontal light shelf.
Figure 11. Light shelf designs examined in [63].

Xue et al. [64] examined light shelf performance in a meniscus glazing panel. It’s thickness and
curvature
Xue etangle were
al. [64] the parameters
examined light shelfstudied which in
performance affected its performance.
a meniscus The
glazing panel. It’sresults, after
thickness anda
simulation of a South
curvature angle were oriented room instudied
the parameters Hong Kong,
whichChina (Latitude:
affected 22.39° N) with
its performance. dimensions
The results, afterofa
simulation of a South oriented room in Hong Kong, China (Latitude: 22.39° N) with dimensions of
Xue et al. [64] examined light shelf performance in a meniscus glazing panel. It’s thickness and
curvature angle were the parameters studied which affected its performance. The results, after
Sustainability 2018, 10, 0071 10.3390/su10010071
a
14 of 24
◦
simulation of a South oriented room in Hong Kong, China (Latitude: 22.39 N) with dimensions of
10 ×
10 × 1515m mand
andaaceiling
ceilingheight
heightof of33m
mwith
with window-to-wall
window-to-wall Ratio
Ratio of
of 52%
52% are
are as
as follows.
follows. The
The meniscus
meniscus
glazing panel enhances the illuminance in summer, and reduces it in winter, while the opposite
glazing panel enhances the illuminance in summer, and reduces it in winter, while the opposite
happens with
happens with uniformity.
uniformity. An An increase
increase in
in illuminance is observed
illuminance is observed when
when the
the curvature
curvature angle
angle ranges
ranges
from 0 ◦ to 44.3◦ at high solar altitudes, and between 44.3◦ and 90◦ for low solar altitudes.
from 0° to 44.3° at high solar altitudes, and between 44.3° and 90° for low solar altitudes.
2.4. Performance
2.4. Performance Analysis
Analysis of
of Active
Active Light
Light Shelves
Shelves
In 1983,
In 1983,Smart
Smartand andBallinger
Ballinger[65][65] proposed
proposed a set
a set of tracking
of tracking mirrors
mirrors on anonequatorial
an equatorialmount. mount.
This
This
arrangement was selected because the reflected beam is parallel to the right-ascension axis axis
arrangement was selected because the reflected beam is parallel to the right-ascension and
and collection area can be maximized. The results showed that lighting
collection area can be maximized. The results showed that lighting energy savings of up to energy savings of up to
200 Wh/m 2 day can be achieved in areas where normal beam illuminance exceeds 50,000 lx for at least
200 Wh/m2day can be achieved in areas where normal beam illuminance exceeds 50,000 lx for at least
four hours
four hours per
per day.
day.
Franco [66]
Franco [66]examined
examined thethe
difference between
difference static and
between staticdynamic light shelfs
and dynamic (tilt shelfs
light angle adjustment)
(tilt angle
using simulations and scale model measurements in Sao Paulo, Brazil (Latitude: − 23 ◦ S). The specific
adjustment) using simulations and scale model measurements in Sao Paulo, Brazil (Latitude: −23° S).
paper deals with heat gains as well, a rather rare fact in the bibliography.
The specific paper deals with heat gains as well, a rather rare fact in the bibliography. The north The north oriented scale
models used had dimensions of 0.6 × 1 m with a ceiling height equal to 0.6
oriented scale models used had dimensions of 0.6 × 1 m with a ceiling height equal to 0.6 m and a m and a window-to-wall
Ratio of 100%. Illuminance
window-to-wall Ratio of 100%.andIlluminance
radiant energy and measurements
radiant energy were collected. were
measurements Two collected.
test cells were
Two
used in parallel with one of them having a static light shelf and the other
test cells were used in parallel with one of them having a static light shelf and the other a dynamic a dynamic one using
polished
one usingaluminum on the upper
polished aluminum on thesurface.
upperIn comparison
surface. with standard
In comparison horizontal
with standard shading shading
horizontal devices
the heat gain using light shelves increased, but this does not seem to affect
devices the heat gain using light shelves increased, but this does not seem to affect overheating overheating conditions.
Static light shelves,
conditions. improve
Static light uniformity,
shelves, improve but uniformity,
they decreasebut illuminance levels illuminance
they decrease under overcast conditions.
levels under
On the other hand, dynamic ones should be set in its optimum tilt in accordance
overcast conditions. On the other hand, dynamic ones should be set in its optimum tilt in accordance with the sun’s
position. Otherwise,
with the sun’s theyOtherwise,
position. will have atheyperformance
will have less than the static
a performance lesslight
thanshelf. Kontadakis
the static and
light shelf.
Tsangrassoulis [67,68] assessed the daylight performance of a deep office
Kontadakis and Tsangrassoulis [67,68] assessed the daylight performance of a deep office space space together with its energy
balance when
together anenergy
with its active sunlight redirection
balance when an activesystem
sunlightwas redirection
used mounted systemon was
a light
usedshelf (Figureon
mounted 12).
a
The results from the assessment of the system indicate the possibility
light shelf (Figure 12). The results from the assessment of the system indicate the possibility ofof significantly improving
the daylight levels
significantly of non-daylit
improving areas
the daylight ranging
levels from 30%areas
of non-daylit to 50%, depending
ranging from 30%on the mirror
to 50%, area and
depending
on improvements in uniformity (<40%) when compared
on the mirror area and on improvements in uniformity (<40%) when compared to anto an unshaded/unobstructed reference
case. Although lighting energy
unshaded/unobstructed savings
reference case. can be achieved,
Although lightingcooling
energy consumption
savings canincreases
be achieved,significantly,
cooling
diminishing the aforementioned lighting energy savings.
consumption increases significantly, diminishing the aforementioned lighting energy savings.
Figure 12. Schematic representation of the sunlight redirection system examined in [68,69].
Figure 12. Schematic representation of the sunlight redirection system examined in [68,69].
Dogan and Stec [69] used a simulation approach to optimize the design of a horizontal light shelf,
composed of an array of mirror tiles that can tilt on two axes tracking he sun. Five alternative designs
were examined in an effort to select the most efficient variant. This consisted of a frame which holds
an array of fifteen mirror tiles. Two stepper motors are used to rotate the system on two axes. The
system was simulated in three locations, New York (Latitude: 40.70°), Anchorage (Latitude: 61.21°)
Dogan and Stec [69] used a simulation approach to optimize the design of a horizontal light shelf,
composed of an array of mirror tiles that can tilt on two axes tracking he sun. Five alternative designs
were examined in an effort to select the most efficient variant. This consisted of a frame which holds an
array of fifteen
Sustainability 2018, mirror
10, 0071 tiles. Two stepper motors are used to rotate the system on two axes. The system
10.3390/su10010071 15 of 24
was simulated in three locations, New York (Latitude: 40.70◦ ), Anchorage (Latitude: 61.21◦ ) and
Phoenix (Latitude: ◦ ), using a room of dimensions 9 × 12 m with a ceiling height of 3 m. For the
33.4433.44°),
and Phoenix (Latitude: using a room of dimensions 9 × 12 m with a ceiling height of 3 m. For
first two two
the first locations, a south
locations, orientation
a south was used
orientation was while for thefor
used while third
theeast-west orientations
third east-west tested as
orientations well.
tested
The findings
as well. show that
The findings the dynamic
show light shelf
that the dynamic didshelf
light increase daylight daylight
did increase levels resulting in an increase
levels resulting in an
of estimated
increase lighting energy
of estimated lightingsavings
energy in comparison
savings with a mirror
in comparison with astatic
mirror shelf of shelf
static 8% (Phoenix EW) to
of 8% (Phoenix
22%
EW) (Phoenix S).
to 22% (Phoenix S).
Raphael [54] examined a light shelf with adaptive geometry. This consisted of an external part
which
which could
couldbebe rotated, andand
rotated, an internal part whose
an internal part depth
whosecan be adjusted.
depth can be Using a global
adjusted. optimization
Using a global
algorithm
optimization algorithm and radiance simulation, managed to estimate the hourly variationangle
and radiance simulation, managed to estimate the hourly variation of the light shelf of thein
an effort
light to minimize
shelf angle in lighting
an effortenergy consumption
to minimize in anenergy
lighting office building in Singapore
consumption in an (Latitude: ◦
1.35 N).
office building in
Results
Singapore indicate that lighting
(Latitude: 1.35° N).energy
Results savings of that
indicate about 12% areenergy
lighting possible compared
savings of aboutto a 12%
traditional static
are possible
compared
light shelf. toLima traditional
and Heng [70] static light shelf.
extended Lim and Heng [70]
the abovementioned extended
study [43] bythe abovementioned
examining study
the daylighting
[43] by examining
performance the daylighting
of various performance
internal light of various internal
shelf configurations light shelf configurations
using radiance-based simulationsusingand
radiance-based
physical simulations
scale model and physical
experiments. scale
Again, model
side experiments.
by side Again,in
measurements side by side
scale modelsmeasurements
were used,
in scale
one modelswith
equipped werethe
used, one equipped
internal with the
light shelve internal light(Figure
configurations shelve configurations
13) and the other (Figure 13) as
acting and a
the other acting
reference case. as a reference case.
Figure 13. Schematic representation of the dynamic light shelf operation based on the optimum cases
Figure 13. Schematic representation of the dynamic light shelf operation based on the optimum cases
(Modes’ (A–C)) proposed in [70].
(Modes’ (A–C)) proposed in [70].
The findings suggest that the height of the clerestory window plays an essential role in
The findings
determining the suggest that theofheight
performance lightofshelves.
the clerestory
Compared window to plays an essentialcase,
the reference role in
a determining
decrease in
the performance of light shelves. Compared to the reference case, a decrease
illuminance values was observed, but there was a significant increase of uniformity. Light in illuminance values was
shelves
observed, but there was a significant increase of uniformity. Light shelves with
with 0.9 m clerestory height had higher indoor illuminance than light shelves with 0.6 m clerestory 0.9 m clerestory height
had higher
height, but indoor illuminance
when compared thethan light shelves
optimum cases towith 0.6 mcase
the base clerestory
a decreaseheight,
in thebutpercentage
when compared of DF
the optimum cases to the base case a decrease in the percentage
ranging from −62.0% to 34.1% was recorded. The optimum cases showed a significantof DF ranging from −62.0%
increaseto 34.1%
in the
was recorded.
percentage The optimum
of uniformity up cases showed
to 178.6%. a significant
Based increasethe
on the findings, inauthors
the percentage
suggested of uniformity
that under up to
clear
178.6%. Based onthe
sky conditions, thedaylighting
findings, the authors suggested
performance that
of a light under
shelf clear sky
depends on conditions,
the dynamicthe daylighting
movement of
performance of a light shelf depends on the dynamic movement of solar
solar position and proposed a dynamic light shelf control with adjustable height that responded position and proposed to
a
thedynamic
optimallight shelf control
configurations. The with adjustable
authors height
suggested that responded
a three-step controltoofthe optimal configurations.
deployment of the shelves
The
that authors
could besuggested
achieved abythree-step
using an control of deployment
illuminance of the shelves
sensor to measure that could
the outdoor be achieved
illuminance andby if
using an illuminance sensor to measure the outdoor illuminance and if values
values below 20 K lx where measured (which was assumed to represent an overcast sky in the tropic) below 20 K lx where
measured (which was assumed
the first configuration could betoemployed.
represent an overcast
During sky in the tropic)
an intermediate day,thethefirst configuration
dynamic internalcould
light
shelf could be programmed to configure the other two steps, based on the orientations, months and
times.
Kostantoglou and Tsangrassoulis [53] examined a method of control based on the tilt angle of
an exterior mirror light shelf according to the position of the sun and a predefined target area on the
ceiling and analyzed the resulting lighting energy savings. Two case studies were simulated in a deep,
be employed. During an intermediate day, the dynamic internal light shelf could be programmed to
configure the other two steps, based on the orientations, months and times.
Kostantoglou and Tsangrassoulis [53] examined a method of control based on the tilt angle of
an exterior mirror light shelf according to the position of the sun and a predefined target area on
the ceiling and analyzed the resulting lighting energy savings. Two case studies were simulated in
a deep, South oriented office space with dimensions 4 × 7 × 2.8 m: (a) with static and, (b) with an
Sustainability 2018,controlled
automatically exterior light shelf in Athens, Greece (Latitude: 37.8◦ ).
10, 0071 10.3390/su10010071 16 of 24
Using the above Figure 14, the tilting angle of the light shelf (ϑ) was defined as follows:
Using the above Figure 14, the tilting angle of the light shelf ( ) was defined as follows:
ϑ = (θsun −−ω )/2 (5)
= 2
(5)
where
where θsun isisthe
theprojected sun’s
projected elevation
sun’s angle,
elevation andand
angle, ω a constant angleangle
a constant defined by theby
defined aiming point.
the aiming
The resulting daylight autonomy values strongly depended on window size. Using only
point. The resulting daylight autonomy values strongly depended on window size. Using only the the clerestory
window
clerestory(window-to-floor Ratio 6.2%)Ratio
window (window-to-floor the increase in daylight
6.2%) the increase autonomy
in daylightwas 5 times was
autonomy its value of the
5 times its
reference case (without light-shelf) while when view window was used the aforementioned
value of the reference case (without light-shelf) while when view window was used the increase
was only 1.15. increase was only 1.15.
aforementioned
Figure 14. Tilted light shelf reflecting sunlight on a specified area on the ceiling examined in [53].
Figure 14. Tilted light shelf reflecting sunlight on a specified area on the ceiling examined in [53].
An interesting concept is the one that was proposed by Howard et al. [71]. VALRA (Variable
AreaAn interesting
Light Reflectingconcept is the one
Assemblies) is athat was proposed
tracking light shelf bysystem
Howard et reflects
that al. [71]. light
VALRA into(Variable
a buildingAreaat
Light Reflecting Assemblies) is a tracking light shelf system that reflects light into
the south elevation or the roof and utilizes both direct and diffuse sunlight. This configuration can a building at the
south
performelevation
more or the roof and
efficiently underutilizes both direct
all incident sunand diffuseUsing
angles. sunlight. This configuration
a direct current (DC)can perform
motor, the
more efficiently under all incident sun angles. Using a direct current (DC)
reflective plastic film surface can be adjusted over a spring-loaded tracking roller assemblymotor, the reflective plastic
as
film surface can be adjusted over a spring-loaded tracking roller assembly as presented
presented in Figure 15. The effectiveness of the system is limited to a depth of about 9 m depending in Figure 15.
The effectiveness
on sky conditions ofandthe system islimits.
mounting limited Thetopayback
a depth of about
period for9 the
m depending
VALRA was onsaid
sky to
conditions and
vary ranging
mounting limits. The payback period for the VALRA was said to vary ranging from
from three to 20 years depending several parameters like climate, the ratio of the collection area per three to 20 years
depending
illuminatedseveral parameters
floor area, buildinglike
type,climate,
utilitythe ratio
rate, etc. of the collection area per illuminated floor area,
building type, utility rate, etc.
perform more efficiently under all incident sun angles. Using a direct current (DC) motor, the
reflective plastic film surface can be adjusted over a spring-loaded tracking roller assembly as
presented in Figure 15. The effectiveness of the system is limited to a depth of about 9 m depending
on sky conditions and mounting limits. The payback period for the VALRA was said to vary ranging
from three2018,
Sustainability to 2010,years
71 depending several parameters like climate, the ratio of the collection area per
17 of 24
illuminated floor area, building type, utility rate, etc.
Figure 15. Operation principle of the VARLA system presented in [71].

Figure 15. Operation principle of the VARLA system presented in [71].
3. Discussion
Daylight exploitation can increase performance and users’ satisfaction of a building. However, to
effectively use natural light, greater consideration is required, as every building is a unique structure
and requires a different design approach. Architectural shading/daylighting systems can deliver
daylight and possibly can reduce energy consumption in buildings. Is it possible to compare different
light shelf designs with each other? Although the answer could be positive, in practice, such a direct
comparison is problematic on the component’s level. As already mentioned, most of the building
standards are oriented in the performance based approach, where specific targets for the whole
building are set. Consequently, the estimation of the light shelf’s performance for either daylighting
or energy consumption must always be performed in relation to the space in which they are placed.
In practice, design teams use “rules of thumb” for the design of light shelves, an approach that can
adversely affect their performance. Of course, a simulation analysis could lead to an optimal solution
given that there is a budget for this. Since the light shelves are integrated into the facade, they are
subject to the building code restrictions as far as their dimensions are concerned. In many cases, light
shelves are actually part of the building structure, making the determination of their cost effectiveness
difficult. According to our review results, there is no paper which investigates the cost optimal
analysis for the light shelves. For the determination of cost-effectiveness, a life cycle analysis is needed
where all costs related to the light shelf (initial, installation, operation, maintenance and disposal)
are evaluated over its economic life. Conventional external flat light shelves can cost approximately
~100 $ per m2 [72]. Depending on the geometric form of the light shelf and the finish of the upper
surface, costs can vary widely. In general, light shelves are not standard products since external light
shelves are designed as part of the building façade. However internal ones are today available in
prefabricated modules [73–76].
This paper provides an overview of the research realized on light shelves over the last 34 years
examining forty papers which address the daylight impacts of light shelves in the built environment.
In the majority (92%) of the cases reviewed, a south oriented open-plan office space having depth
ranging from 5 m to 9 m was considered with ceiling heights between 2.7 and 3.5 m and window-to-wall
Ratio between 10% and 100% under climates with high sunlight availability. In a small percentage
(18%) of the cases, there was an assessment of the light shelf performance in a full-scale mockup since
computer simulations or experiments with scale models are considered as accurate and cost-effective
approaches. However, the simulation results should be viewed with caution especially when a
geometrically and optically complicated design is used as these require validation against scale model
measurements. Horizontal shelves are assessed more frequently with 37% of the cases are dealt with
curved forms. The majority (82%) of the systems examined in this review were static and it seems that
the analysis of their dynamic behavior is quite limited.
4. Conclusions
It is not easy to draw practical rules from the review since design problems involving the adoption
of light shelves may differ considerably in each case. In addition, since different test room dimensions
have been used in different climates, either for measurements or simulation, the comparison of the
performance of various light shelf designs using existing research results is also difficult.
Nevertheless, there are some common findings:
1 Light shelves perform differently under various sky conditions. The least favorable condition is
that associated with overcast sky conditions. This situation results in an overall reduction in interior
daylight illuminances although a slight increase of uniformity can be achieved. However, it seems
that the use of an anidolic shelf can increase the daylight factors in comparison to a reference
facade with conventional double glazing. In the deeper parts of the room, this increase was
1.7 times the value of the reference case when an urban environment was simulated [61].
2 Light shelves performed best when installed in south-oriented facades.
3 Light shelves are usually placed above eye level in an effort to prevent glare form their upper
surface. However, in the Collège la Vanoise in Modane, France, south window sills are used as
specular light shelves having a tilt towards the south to avoid glare. Because of this tilt, the light
shelf presents a seasonal selectivity to reflected sunlight.
4 Exterior light shelves can shade the lower window and if designed properly their performance
can be better than conventional shading systems (i.e., overhangs) [39,46].
5 Uniformity of daylight illuminance do increase although luminance contrast can be increased
giving rise to glare problems. The maximum uniformity increase that was reported is 178.6% in
comparison with the reference case (i.e., window without any shading system) under clear sky
conditions [63]. Under overcast conditions, uniformity is also improved but this is due to the
reduction of illuminance levels in the area near the window. Another way to increase uniformity
is to use an optically treated upper surface [47]. By using small mirrored surfaces oriented
properly, uniformity can increase by 29.9–34.3% for the external light shelf and 10.4–13.7% for the
internal, compared to the existing flat mirror-type light shelf.
6 In very broad terms, the maximum value of an external light shelf depth (dext lightshel f ,max ) can be
defined by [33,34] using the equation:
dext lightshel f ,max ≤ 1.5 × hclerestory (6)
An extreme value of two to three times the height of the clerestory window was proposed
by Abdulmohsen et al. [36] when the light shelf needs to be optimized for low sun altitudes.
For internal light shelves, their maximum depth value reported in the literature is again by
Abdulmohsen et al. [36]. They proposed that the internal light shelf depth should be two to three
times the height of the clerestory window in an effort to reduce sun patches on the working
surface. However, in the majority of the cases, internal light shelf depths ranging from 0.4–1.85 m
were examined.
7 In terms of work-plane illuminances, when a light shelf is used there is an overall decrease of
illuminance values between 20% and 60% in comparison with a reference case (unshaded, no
light shelf) while its effectiveness decreased after 6–7 m from the window. However, light shelves
can increase work-plane illuminance levels in the secondary non-daylit zone ranging from 10%
to over 70% when highly reflective materials or mirror surfaces are used. This relative increase is
inversely proportional to the window size. [40,45,50,53,56,59,63,67,69].
8 A slight tilt of a light shelf can increase the light flux entering the room especially during summer
months in the northern hemisphere, increasing at the same time the cooling load. The increase
of the latitude decreases this angle [47]. In [60] Lee et al. using a light shelf that is 0.6 m wide
with a tilt angle equal to 30◦ upwards for buildings in Korea achieved savings for both lighting
and cooling. They suggest that during winter the light shelf should be removed to save energy.
It seems that the equation (4) proposed by Moore [50] give results compatible with those found
by Meresi’s work [51] while diverging slightly from those of Warrier and Raphael [46].
9 It seems that the shape of the ceiling can affect the distribution of illuminance. When chamfered
ceiling is used, the illuminance levels increased in the rear part of the room by 21–36% and
decreased by 20–55% in the front. If specular ceiling is used a further increase in illuminance
levels occur [39,52]. Changing ceiling surface reflectance type to specular further increased
illuminance levels in the back of the room was observed. In addition, the external curved and
chamfered exterior light shelves performed better when a curved ceiling is used [54].
10 Dynamic control of mirrored light shelves can offer some benefits since they can redirect
sunlight into a specific area on the ceiling. The results suggest that small window-to-floor
ratio achieve the largest percentage increase in daylight illuminance in the deeper part of the
space. Motorized designs achieved an increase in lighting energy savings in comparison with a
static mirror light shelf from 8–22% [42,51,53,62,70].
As already mentioned, a light shelf is one of the simplest daylighting systems. Regardless of
its ease of installation, it should be designed to suit specific demands, and this can pose a difficulty
since it requires specific knowledge. Despite the research already made, there is little information on
how light shelves can be best practically used. We believe that further research is needed with light
shelves installed in real buildings where post-occupancy evaluations can be realized together with
measurements. In a full-scale system, all possible inaccuracies of the reflective surface together with
the deterioration of its reflective properties over time could be assessed. Of course, real scale testing is
accurate but is also expensive and consequently simulation is used instead. This is a challenge that we
need to address. The material used at a light shelf’s upper surface must sustain a very high reflectance
value over time. Metal mirrors are available today offering several advantages since they have
the formability needed for curved light shelves together with excellent maintenance characteristics.
Unfortunately, maintenance costs have not been investigated thoroughly with respect to daylighting
systems literature [77]. Dirt can reduce 8–12% the reflectance of mirrors [78] and thus, a variety of
coatings have been developed to improve mirror performance. For example, TiO2 coatings are used
today as anti-soiling layers. This approach is considered as a preventive technique while restorative
techniques are used as well (i.e., manual cleaning).
Despite the adoption of computer simulation programs, the complexity of these programs together
with their limitations in simulating optically complex surfaces and/or actively controlled reflecting
surfaces can be identified as weaknesses when it is required to estimate a system’s performance on
an hourly basis. The majority of building energy simulation tools use time series of work plane
illuminance to estimate the energy savings due to the adoption of a daylight responsive lighting
control system with known characteristics. This information is useful when various design alternatives
are compared but it is of a limited value when a close to reality estimation of savings is required.
The ceiling placed photo-sensor corresponds to incident illumination and converts it to a control signal.
Selection of a sensor’s proper field of view according to the geometrical characteristics of the space
is quite crucial in optimizing the performance of the system. The use of a light shelf can increase
the signal of the sensor due to the reflected illuminance making it difficult to accurately track the
illuminance changes on the working plane. Therefore, more studies are needed on real spaces equipped
with light shelf and daylight dimming systems. A decision support system (DSS) would be most
welcomed by the design teams. This DSS should be based on a benchmarking process which involves
estimating the performance of a specific light shelf design against a reference case. This case involves
the use of a test room with specific dimensions. Benchmarking a design can provide insight into how
well this is performing, allowing the design team to discover what characteristics need improvements.
Last but not least, all the aforementioned issues should be accompanied by a life cycle assessment to
identify the types of light shelves that are environment friendly. The conclusions of this review help to
identify the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the light shelves as a daylighting/shading
system. These are presented in Table 1 as a result coming from the literature analysis.
Table 1. Synoptic presentation of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the light
shelves as a daylighting/shading system.
Strengths Weaknesses
• Justification of energy savings. Total energy savings
• Indoor lighting environment improvement. are questionable since any increase in solar gains
• Productivity, well-being and mood improvement. might offset lighting energy savings.
• Illuminance uniformity improvement. • Reflected illuminance can deteriorate the performance
•• Development
Lighting energyof new increase.
savings of a daylight-linked lighting control system.
• coatings/materials
Ease of installation.
in an effort to • Glare problems.
• Well-accepted by architectural community. • Maintenance, especially for dynamic systems.
redistribute properly solar • Manufacturing
• of curved
Daylight analysis highly
software reflecting
limitations.
illuminance. Opportunities surfaces might be difficult. Any intolerance might
Threats
•• Daylight analysis software
Development of new coatings/materials in an effort to
adversely affect user acceptance.
improvement.
redistribute properly solar illuminance. • There
• isManufacturing
a lack of theofexpertise needed
curved highly for surfaces
reflecting
•• Daylight analysis software improvement.
Manufacturing process upgrade for advanced light shelf design since currentadversely
might be difficult. Any intolerance might design
• Manufacturing process upgrade for producing curved affect user acceptance.
producing curved
light shelves. light shelves. methodologies
• are quite complicated for the
There is a lack of the expertise needed for advanced
•• Development
Development ofof control
control algorithms for sun tracking design teams.
algorithms light shelf design since current design methodologies
are quite complicated for the design teams.
light shelves.
for sun tracking light shelves. • Cost effectiveness.
• Cost reduction. • Cost effectiveness.
•• Cost reduction.
Benchmark development.
• Benchmark development.
Figure 16
Figure 16 presents
presentsthetheannual
annualnumber
numberofofpapers
papersreviewed
reviewedfrom
from1983 tilltill
1983 today. It seems
today. thatthat
It seems in the
in
last two years there has been a substantial increase in this number. We believe that the
the last two years there has been a substantial increase in this number. We believe that the reason for reason for this
increase
this is the
increase is effort to achieve
the effort costcost
to achieve efficient solutions
efficient in order
solutions to exploit
in order daylight,
to exploit and,and,
daylight, of course, the
of course,
improvements in the daylight simulation software.
the improvements in the daylight simulation software.
8
7
6
Number of papers
5
4
3
2
1
0
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Year
Figure 16. Annual number of papers dealing with the impact of light shelves on the illuminance in buildings.
Figure 16. Annual number of papers dealing with the impact of light shelves on the illuminance
in buildings.
The main results of this work point out that there is research that needs to be realized in order
to improve the performance of light shelves. It seems that there are several opportunities in relation
to new materials, new geometries and dynamic operation of the light shelves, defining the future
research focus.
Acknowledgments: This study was funded by the “Research projects for excellence IKY/SIEMENS”.
The main results of this work point out that there is research that needs to be realized in order
to improve the performance of light shelves. It seems that there are several opportunities in relation
to new materials, new geometries and dynamic operation of the light shelves, defining the future
research focus.
Acknowledgments: This study was funded by the “Research projects for excellence IKY/SIEMENS”.
Author Contributions: Antonis Kontadakis and Aris Tsangrassoulis are the main contributors to this paper
Lambros Doulos and Stelios Zerefos made substantial contribution to the research work and the SWOT method.
Conflicts of Interest: The founding sponsors had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses,
or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, and in the decision to publish the results.
References
1. Lockley, S.W. Influence of Light on Circadian Rhythmicity in Humans. In Encyclopedia of Neuroscience;
Elsevier: Oxford, UK, 2008.
2. Boyce, P.R.; Hunter, C.; Howlett, H. The Benefits of Daylight through Windows; Lighting Research Center:
New York, NY, USA, 2003.
3. Rashid, M.; Zimring, C. A Review of the Empirical Literature on the Relationships between Indoor
Environment and Stress in Health Care and Office Settings: Problems and Prospects of Sharing Evidence.
Environ. Behav. 2008, 40, 151–173. [CrossRef]
4. Edwards, L.; Torcellini, P. A Literature Review of the Effects of Natural Light on Building Occupants; National
Renewable Energy Laboratory: Golden, CO, USA, 2002.
5. Galasiu, A.D.; Veitch, J.A. Occupant Preferences and Satisfaction with the Luminous Environment and
Control Systems in Daylit Offices: A Literature Review. Energy Build. 2006, 38, 728–742. [CrossRef]
6. Gago, E.J.; Muneer, T.; Knez, M.; Köster, H. Natural Light Controls and Guides in Buildings. Energy Saving
for Electrical Lighting, Reduction of Cooling Load. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 41, 1–13. [CrossRef]
7. Doulos, L.; Tsangrassoulis, A.; Topalis, F.V. Multi-criteria decision analysis to select the optimum position
and proper field of view of a photosensor. Energy Convers. Manag. 2014, 86, 1069–1077. [CrossRef]
8. Doulos, L.T.; Tsangrassoulis, A.; Kontaxis, P.A.; Kontadakis, A.; Topalis, F.V. Harvesting daylight with LED
or T5 fluorescent lamps? The role of dimming. Energy Build. 2017, 140, 336–347. [CrossRef]
9. Doulos, L.; Tsangrassoulis, A.; Topalis, F. Quantifying energy savings in daylight responsive systems:
The role of dimming electronic ballasts. Energy Build. 2008, 40, 36–50. [CrossRef]
10. Lee, H.; Kim, S.; Seo, J. Evaluation of a light shelf based on energy consumption for lighting and air
conditioning. Indoor Built Environ. 2017. [CrossRef]
11. Reinhart, C.F. A Simulation Based Review on the Ubiquitous Window Head Height to Daylit Zone
Depth Rule of Thumb. In Proceedings of the 9th International IBPSA Conference, Montréal, QC, Canada,
15–18 August 2005.
12. EN 15193–1: Energy Performance of Buildings. Energy Requirements for Lighting. 2017. Available online:
https://shop.bsigroup.com/ProductDetail?pid=000000000030292858 (accessed on 5 November 2017).
13. Reinhart, C.F.; LoVerso, V.R.M. A rules of thumb–based design sequence for diffuse daylight. Light. Res. Technol.
2010, 42, 7–31. [CrossRef]
14. Kontadakis, A.; Tsangrassoulis, A.; Roetzel, A. Defining the Boundaries of Daylight Penetration. The use
of dynamic and static daylight methods to predict the daylit zone within sidelit spaces, a comparison.
In Proceedings of the BalkanLight 2015, the 6th Balkan Conference on Lighting, Athens, Greece,
16–19 September 2015.
15. Konstantoglou, M.; Tsangrassoulis, A. Dynamic operation of daylighting and shading systems: A literature
review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 60, 268–283. [CrossRef]
16. Bellia, L.; Marino, C.; Minichiello, F.; Pedace, A. An Overview on Solar Shading Systems for Buildings.
Energy Procedia 2017, 62, 309–317. [CrossRef]
17. Aschehoug, O.; Christoffersen, J.; Jakobiak, R.; Johnsen, K.; Lee, E.; Ruck, N.; Selkowitz, S. Daylight in
Buildings: A Source Book on Daylighting Systems and Components; Report of IEA SHC Task 21/ECBCS Annex 29;
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2000. Available online: https://facades.lbl.
gov/publications/daylight-buildings-source-book-daylighting-systems (accessed on 5 November 2017).
18. Mayhoub, M.S. Innovative daylighting systems’ challenges: A critical study. Energy Build. 2014, 80, 394–405.
[CrossRef]
19. Aizlewood, M.E. Innovative daylighting systems: An experimental evaluation. Int. J. Light. Res. Technol.
1993, 25, 141–152. [CrossRef]
20. Littlefair, P.J. Developments in Innovative Daylighting; IHS BRE Press: Bracknell, UK, 2000.
21. Littlefair, P.J. Innovative daylighting: Review of systems and evaluation methods. Light. Res. Technol. 1990,
22, 1–17. [CrossRef]
22. Wong, I.L. A review of daylighting design and implementation in buildings. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
2017, 74, 959–968. [CrossRef]
23. Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA). Recommended Practice of Daylighting, RP-5,
1978. In IES Lighting Handbook; IESNA: New York, NY, USA, 2000.
24. Kischkoweit-Lopin, M. An overview of daylighting systems. Sol. Energy 2002, 73, 77–82. [CrossRef]
25. Littlefair, P.J.; Aizlewood, M.E.; Birtles, A.B. The performance of innovative daylighting systems.
Renew. Energy 1994, 5, 920–934. [CrossRef]
26. Freewan, A.A. Developing daylight devices matrix with special integration with building design process.
Sustain. Cities Soc. 2015, 15, 144–152. [CrossRef]
27. Nair, M.; Ramamurthy, K.; Ganesan, A. Classification of indoor daylight enhancement systems.
Light. Res. Technol. 2014, 46, 245–267. [CrossRef]
28. Mayhoub, M.; Carter, D. Hybrid lighting systems: Performance and design. Light. Res. Technol. 2012, 44,
261–276. [CrossRef]
29. Wassim, J.; Potamianos, I. Geometry, Light, and Cosmology in the Church of Hagia Sophia. Int. J. Archit. Comput.
2007, 5, 304–319.
30. Potamianos, I. Light into Architecture: The Evocative Use of Natural Light as Related to Liturgy in Byzantine
Churches. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 1996.
31. Tageslichtreflector. Available online: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:L-Tageslichtreflector.png
(accessed on 5 November 2017).
32. Hopkinson, R.G. Daylighting a hospital ward. Archit. J. 1952, 115, 255–259.
33. Selkowitz, S.; Navvab, M.; Mathews, S. Design and Performance of Light Shelves. In Proceedings of the
International Daylighting Conference, Phoenix, AZ, USA, 16–18 February 1983.
34. Place, W.; Howard, T.C. Daylighting Multistory Office Buildings; North Carolina Alternative Energy
Corporation: Raleigh, NC, USA, 1990.
35. Littlefair, P.J. Light shelves: Computer assessment of daylighting performance. Light. Res. Technol. 1995, 27,
79–91. [CrossRef]
36. Abdulmohsen, A.; Boyer, L.; Degelman, L. Evaluation of lightshelf daylighting systems for office buildings
in hot climates. In Proceedings of the Ninth Symposium on Improving Building Systems in Hot and Humid
Climates, Arlington, TX, USA, 19–20 May 1994.
37. Soler, A.; Oteiza, P. Dependence on solar elevation of the performance of a light shelf as a potential daylighting
device. Renew. Energy 1996, 8, 198–201. [CrossRef]
38. Soler, A.; Oteiza, P. Light Shelf performance in Madrid Spain. Build. Environ. 1997, 22, 87–93. [CrossRef]
39. Claros, S.T.; Soler, A. Indoor daylight climate-comparison between light shelves and overhang performances
in Madrid for hours with unit sunshine fraction and realistic values of model reflectance. Sol. Energy 2001,
71, 233–239. [CrossRef]
40. Berardi, U.; Anaraki, H.K. The benefits of light shelves over the daylight illuminance in office buildings in
Toronto. Indoor Build Environ. 2016, 1–19. [CrossRef]
41. Ochoa, C.E.; Capeluto, I.G. Evaluating visual comfort and performance of three natural lighting systems for
deep office buildings in highly luminous climates. Build. Environ. 2006, 41, 1128–1135. [CrossRef]
42. Joarder, M.A.R.; Ahmed, Z.N.; Price, A.; Mourshed, M. A simulation assessment of the height of light
shelves to enhance daylighting quality in tropical office buildings under overcast sky conditions in Dhaka,
Bangladesh. In Proceedings of the 11th International IBPSA Conference, Glasgow, UK, 27–30 July 2009.
43. Hu, J.; Du, J.; Place, W. The Assessment of Advanced Daylighting Systems in Multi-Story Office Buildings
Using a Dynamic Method. In Proceedings of the World Renewable Energy Congress, Low Energy
Architecture (LEA), Linkoping, Sweden, 8–13 May 2011.
44. Lim, Y.; Ahmad, M.H. The effects of direct sunlight on light shelf performance under tropical sky.
Indoor Built Environ. 2015, 24, 788–802. [CrossRef]
45. Kurtay, C.; Esen, O. A new method for light shelf design according to latitudes: CUN-OKAY light shelf
curves. J. Build. Eng. 2017, 10, 140–148. [CrossRef]
46. Warrier, G.A.; Raphael, B. Performance evaluation of light shelves. Energy Build. 2017, 140, 19–27. [CrossRef]
47. Lee, H.; Jeon, G.; Seo, J.; Kim, Y. Daylighting performance improvement of a light-shelf using diffused
reflection. Indoor Build Environ. 2017, 26, 717–726. [CrossRef]
48. Moscoso, C.; Matusiak, B. Aesthetic perception of a small office with different daylighting systems.
Indoor Built Environ. 2017. [CrossRef]
49. Moazzeni, M.H.; Ghiabaklou, Z. Investigating the Influence of Light Shelf Geometry Parameters on Daylight
Performance and Visual Comfort, a Case Study of Educational Space in Tehran, Iran. Buildings 2016, 6, 26.
[CrossRef]
50. Moore, F. Concepts and Practice of Architectural Daylighting; Van Nostrand Reinhold Company: New York, NY,
USA, 1985.
51. Meresi, A. Evaluating daylight performance of light shelves combined with external blinds in south-facing
classrooms in Athens, Greece. Energy Build. 2016, 116, 190–205. [CrossRef]
52. Al-Sallal, K.A. Testing glare in universal space design studios in Al-Ain, UAE desert climate and proposed
Improvements. Renew. Energy 2007, 32, 1033–1044. [CrossRef]
53. Kostantoglou, M.; Tsangrassoulis, A. Performance evaluation of an automatically controlled light-shelf.
In Proceedings of the 5th Balkan Light Conference, Belgrad, Serbia, 3–6 October 2012.
54. Raphael, B. Active Control of Daylighting Features in Buildings. Comput. Aided Civ. Infrastruct. Eng. 2011, 26,
55. Lee, E.S.; Beltrán, L.O.; Selkowitz, S.E. Demonstration of a Light–redirecting Skylight system at the Palm Springs
Chamber of Commerce. Presented at the ACEEE 1994 Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings,
Building Tomorrow: The Path to Energy Efficiency, Pacific Grove, CA, USA, 28 August–3 September 1994.
56. Beltran, L.O.; Lee, E.S.; Selkowitz, S.E. Advanced Optical Daylighting Systems. In Proceedings of the IESNA
Annual Conference, Cleveland, OH, USA, 4–7 August 1996.
57. Beltran, L.O.; Lee, E.S.; Papamichael, K.M.; Selkowitz, S.E. The Design and Evaluation of Three Advanced
Daylighting Systems: Light Shelves, Light Pipes, and Skylights. In Proceedings of the ASES 19th National
Passive Solar Conference, San Jose, CA, USA, 25–30 June 1994.
58. Lee, E.S.; Selkowitz, S.E.; Rubinstein, F.M.; Klems, J.H.; Beltrán, L.O.; DiBartolomeo, D.L. A Comprehensive
Approach to Integrated Envelope and Lighting Systems for New Commercial Buildings; Report Number: LBL-35732;
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1994.
59. Lee, E.S.; Beltrán, L.O.; Selkowitz, S.E. Demonstration of a Light–redirecting Skylight system at the Palm
Springs Chamber of Commerce. Presented at the 1996 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in
Buildings: Profiting from Energy Efficiency, Pacific Grove, CA, USA, 25–31 August 1996.
60. Lee, H.; Kim, K.; Seo, J.; Kim, Y. Effectiveness of a perforated light shelf for energy saving. Energy Build. 2017,
144, 144–151. [CrossRef]
61. Scartezzini, J.L.; Gouret, G. Anidolic daylighting systems. Sol. Energy 2002, 73, 123–135. [CrossRef]
62. Freewan, A.A.; Shao, L.; Riffat, S. Optimizing performance of the lightshelf by modifying ceiling geometry
in highly luminous climates. Sol. Energy 2008, 82, 343–353. [CrossRef]
63. Freewan, A.A. Maximizing the lightshelf performance by interaction between lightshelf geometries and a
curved ceiling. Energy Convers. Manag. 2010, 51, 1600–1604. [CrossRef]
64. Xue, P.; Mak, C.M.; Cheung, H.D. New static lightshelf system design of clerestory windows for Hong Kong.
Build. Environ. 2014, 72, 368–376. [CrossRef]
65. Smart, M.; Ballinger, J.A. Tracking Mirror Beam Sunlighting for Deep Interior Spaces. Sol. Energy 1983, 30,
66. Franco, I.M. Efficacy of light shelves: Passive, dynamic and automatic devices related to light and
thermal behavior. Presented at the Thermal Performance of Exterior Envelopes of Whole Buildings X,
Clearwater Beach, FL, USA, 2–7 December 2007.
67. Kontadakis, A.; Tsangrassoulis, A. The impacts of a dynamic sunlight redirection system on the energy balance of
office buildings. In Proceedings of the CISBAT 2017 International Conference—Future Buildings & Districts—Energy
Efficiency from Nano to Urban Scale, Lausanne, Switzerland, 6–8 September 2017.
68. Kontadakis, A.; Tsangrassoulis, A.; Doulos, L.; Topalis, F. An active sunlight redirection system for daylight
enhancement beyond the perimeter zone. Build. Environ. 2017, 113, 267–279. [CrossRef]
69. Dogan, T.; Stec, P. Prototyping a façade-mounted, dynamic, dual-axis daylight redirection system.
Light. Res. Technol. 2016, 1–13. [CrossRef]
70. Lim, Y.W.; Heng, C.Y.S. Dynamic Internal Light Shelf for Tropical Daylighting in High-rise Office Buildings.
Build. Environ. 2016, 106, 155–166. [CrossRef]
71. Howard, T.C.; Place, W.; Andersson, B.; Coutiers, P. Variable area light reflecting assemblies (VALRA).
In Proceedings of the 2nd International Daylighting Conference, Long Beach, CA, USA, 4–7 November 1986;
pp. 222–234.
72. Wulfinghoff, R.W. Energy Efficiency Manual; Energy Institute Press: Wheaton, MD, USA, 1999;
ISBN 978-0-9657926-7-7.
73. InLighten Interior Light Shelf. Available online: http://www.kawneer.com/kawneer/north_america/en/
product.asp?prod_id=1852&desc=aluminum-curtain-wall-light-shelves (accessed on 5 November 2017).
74. BrightShelf. Available online: http://brightshelf.com/index.html (accessed on 5 November 2017).
75. aLuminate™ Light Shelves. Available online: https://www.tubeliteinc.com/aluminate-light-shelves/
(accessed on 5 November 2017).
76. Luminance Light Shelf System. Available online: https://www.ykkap.com/commercial/product/sun-
control/luminance/ (accessed on 5 November 2017).
77. Mayhoub, M. Cleaning innovative daylighting systems: Economic assessment. Energy Build. 2017, 153,
63–71. [CrossRef]
78. Atkinson, C.; Sansom, C.L.; Almond, H.J.; Shaw, C.P. Coatings for concentrating solar systems—A review.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 45, 113–122. [CrossRef]
© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
View publication stats

A Review of Light Shelf Designs For Daylit Environments

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Review of Light Shelf Designs For Daylit Environments

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author proﬁles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

A Review of Light Shelf Designs for Daylit Environments

Article in Sustainability · December 2017

Antonis Kontadakis Lambros Doulos

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Tunnel lighting measurements View project

Methodology for the Lighting Design of Historical Buildings View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded ﬁle.

Received: 23 November 2017; Accepted: 24 December 2017; Published: 29 December 2017

Sustainability 2018, 10, 71; doi:10.3390/su10010071 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Figure 2. Daylight reflector by W. Hanifch and Co. [31].

dint lightshel f = hclerestory (2)

dext lightshel f ≤ hlightshel f − hwork− plane (3)

Sustainability 2018, 10, 0071 10.3390/su10010071 8 of 24

and 15◦ for east and west orientation.

2.3. Performance Analysis of Curved Light Shelves

Figure 9. Schematic representation of the cases examined in [56].

Figure 10. Schematic representation of an anidolic daylighting system as examined in [61].

Figure 11. Light shelf designs examined in [63].

Figure 15. Operation principle of the VARLA system presented in [71].

dext lightshel f ,max ≤ 1.5 × hclerestory (6)

View publication stats

You might also like